4 ms·

> But firstly, no one wants this infinite set of email addresses. Gmail already provides this in the better form of plus labelling. What is the difference betw

> But firstly, no one wants this infinite set of email addresses. Gmail already provides this in the better form of plus labelling. What is the difference between dots and pluses? They both have the same flaw: to Netflix they will both be distinct addresses.

theptip 9y ago
It's easy to accidentally type "bob.foo" instead of "bobfoo", and it's also easy to miss the difference if you're the recipient of a malicious attack. It's harder to accidentally type "bobfoo+abc", and it's harder to miss the difference if you're on the receiving end.
- Buge 9y ago
  >It's easy to accidentally type "bob.foo" instead of "bobfoo" If someone made that typo (for a gmail address) everything would be fine, because both emails would go to the same correct person. There needs to be some additional typo for it to go to a different person.
richrichardsson 9y ago
Pluses are part of email standard, dots are some nonsense Google thought was a good idea.
- ahmedalsudani 9y ago
  As far as I know, plus wildcards are not part of the standard either.
  - ipsin 9y ago
    This is an RFC 5233 subaddress.
    - bonercow 9y ago
      You're full of shit. The word "subaddress" doesn't occur anywhere in RFC 5233. The only thing RFC 5233 says about + in email addresses is that it's an allowable character.
      - jsnell 9y ago
        What? It's literally in the title of RFC 5233. "Sieve Email Filtering: Subaddress Extension". The introduction starts with a sentence that defines subaddressing. It has half a dozen references to using + as the separator between the username and the "detail".
- function_seven 9y ago
  Both + and . are allowable characters in the user part of an email address. AFAIK, the tagging functionality isn’t part of the email standard any more than ignoring dots is. EDIT: huh, turns out RFC 5233 covers this. TIL. Thanks, ipsin
- Buge 9y ago
  Plusses are an optional part of a standard[1]. The main email standard does not require a+b@c.com to be treated the same as a@c.com [2]. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.3 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.3
  - 0x0 9y ago
    Another interesting part of dots in emails is that they apparently can't be at the end of the username, EXCEPT if you also "quote" the entire username. So, <a.b.@example.com> is probably invalid but <"a.b."@example.com> (including the "quotes") is supposedly valid. Had an acquaintance who was signed up to a popular email service with "a.b." (their initials) for years until they changed their underlying platform, after which they actually were very sorry to let him know that they could not support his strange email address any more and terminated the account.
  - shkkmo 9y ago
    The use of pluses for tagging/subaddressing is an optional part of the standard. + being valid in an email address is not an optional part of the standard.
ipsin 9y ago
Maaaany email address validators will reject Gmail addresses with + in them as "not valid". "Read the Friendly Standard", I know, but dots are much less likely to be rejected. Half the time I think it's because the site wants it to be less obvious when their database is compromised.
- shkkmo 9y ago
  Authorize.net just started rejecting emails with + signs in them, causing transactions to start failing for many businesses. https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and-Testing/Create-Customer-Profile-requests-with-emails-containing-a-symbol/td-p/62394/page/2 https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and...

theptip 9y ago

It's easy to accidentally type "bob.foo" instead of "bobfoo", and it's also easy to miss the difference if you're the recipient of a malicious attack. It's harder to accidentally type "bobfoo+abc", and it's harder to miss the difference if you're on the receiving end.

Buge 9y ago
>It's easy to accidentally type "bob.foo" instead of "bobfoo" If someone made that typo (for a gmail address) everything would be fine, because both emails would go to the same correct person. There needs to be some additional typo for it to go to a different person.

richrichardsson 9y ago

Pluses are part of email standard, dots are some nonsense Google thought was a good idea.

ahmedalsudani 9y ago
As far as I know, plus wildcards are not part of the standard either.
- ipsin 9y ago
  This is an RFC 5233 subaddress.
  - bonercow 9y ago
    You're full of shit. The word "subaddress" doesn't occur anywhere in RFC 5233. The only thing RFC 5233 says about + in email addresses is that it's an allowable character.
    - jsnell 9y ago
      What? It's literally in the title of RFC 5233. "Sieve Email Filtering: Subaddress Extension". The introduction starts with a sentence that defines subaddressing. It has half a dozen references to using + as the separator between the username and the "detail".
function_seven 9y ago
Both + and . are allowable characters in the user part of an email address. AFAIK, the tagging functionality isn’t part of the email standard any more than ignoring dots is. EDIT: huh, turns out RFC 5233 covers this. TIL. Thanks, ipsin
Buge 9y ago
Plusses are an optional part of a standard[1]. The main email standard does not require a+b@c.com to be treated the same as a@c.com [2]. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.3 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.3
- 0x0 9y ago
  Another interesting part of dots in emails is that they apparently can't be at the end of the username, EXCEPT if you also "quote" the entire username. So, <a.b.@example.com> is probably invalid but <"a.b."@example.com> (including the "quotes") is supposedly valid. Had an acquaintance who was signed up to a popular email service with "a.b." (their initials) for years until they changed their underlying platform, after which they actually were very sorry to let him know that they could not support his strange email address any more and terminated the account.
- shkkmo 9y ago
  The use of pluses for tagging/subaddressing is an optional part of the standard. + being valid in an email address is not an optional part of the standard.

ipsin 9y ago

Maaaany email address validators will reject Gmail addresses with + in them as "not valid". "Read the Friendly Standard", I know, but dots are much less likely to be rejected. Half the time I think it's because the site wants it to be less obvious when their database is compromised.

shkkmo 9y ago
Authorize.net just started rejecting emails with + signs in them, causing transactions to start failing for many businesses. https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and-Testing/Create-Customer-Profile-requests-with-emails-containing-a-symbol/td-p/62394/page/2 https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and...